blackbird

I don't think Jesus forsakes children. There are different views about when believer's children should be baptized. Two schools of thought: infant baptism in Reformed and Presbyterian churches (and some other denominations) and in Baptist churches, believer's baptism. However, it comes down to the truth that salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ alone. Churches that baptize infants believe baptism is a sign and a seal. Baptists who baptize older children when they profess their faith have a similar belief but perhaps slightly different about the meaning of baptism. That is a whole different subject. The essential thing is a person must be born again to receive eternal life. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" book of Acts

I don't understand your perverse logic. Murder is condemned in the Bible. "thou shalt not kill". Jesus loved little children and said of such is the kingdom of God. I think I see what you are getting at. If someone is mentally incapable of understanding the gospel, either because they are too young or are an infant, and they pass away, most churches believe they will go to heaven. God is a just God and merciful and as the bible says, he wills that non will perish.

Arguing about whether Islam can be reformed is ludicrous. There is only one biblical truth. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me." John ch14 vs6 There are many religions but there is only one Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord said in the book of Isaiah "I, even I, am the Lord; and beside me there is no saviour." Isaiah ch 43 vs 11. These verses make is clear there is absolutely no salvation in other religions. One must born again by faith in Jesus. There is no other way.

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John ch3 vs 5. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John ch14 vs6 This verse tells me one must be born again by faith in Jesus Christ in order to have eternal life. There is no other way. One must believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God as the gospels teach, and that he is in fact God as the scriptures teach. The Bible teaches all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. (Romans) Islam does not teach man is a sinner and needs a savior, but the Bible makes it clear he is. The Bible teaches man is in a lost state until he is born again and know Jesus Christ as his personal savior. Do you know Christ as your personal savior? If you were to die at this moment, do you know where you would go? If not, don't waste any more time. Get a bible (KIng Jame Bible) 1611 if an English translation is needed and study and pray. Ask Jesus to save you. That is the most important issue in life.

That's completely false, rubbish.

OK. I think I answered your questions about those verses in the O.T.

?Impact, I can't give you an analysis of those verse right now because of time constraints. I'm not sure if you have a particular comment or question about them. Not exactly sure why you quoted them.

No. That's not how to interpret or understand the Old Testament. As I said it is partly a historical record and not meant to be an instruction on how to live today. Israel was in a unique situation as God's chosen people and Exodus tells the story of how God brought the people of Israel out of captivity and slavery in Egypt and brought them to the promised land under the leadership of Moses. You've probably seen the movie The Ten Commandments. It is probably a rough approximation of what happened but not exact. What God gave for instructions in those days were meant for Israel, not for today. There are some instructions that are for all time such as most of the ten commandments. Examples such as thou shalt not kill. not steal, love thy neighbour , etc.

I have heard those arguments against the bible frequently. Those verses come from a part of the Old Testament which is a historical record of Israel and how God dealt with Israel at that time. Israel was God's chosen people and the first five books and other books in the Old Testament of the Bible are a history of that. They are in no way an instruction for how a christian is to live today. No christian takes those verses to be instruction on how to live today.

I believe the King James Bible (1611) is the inspired word of God. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" 2 Timothy 3:16 "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:21. The Word of God, the Bible, is food for the soul. "And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live." Deuteronomy 8:3 God gave us his word not to harm us, but to give us life. It is for our good that God instructs us on how to live. For our good, he has instructed us by revealing himself and his will for man through inspiration of certain men to write the holy scriptures over a period of about 1500 years, and completed almost 2000 years ago. What God said concerning when we become persons known by God himself is shown in these verses: "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee: and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." Jeremiah 1:5 "For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb." Psalm 139:13

The belief in the sanctity of life, including the sanctity of life of unborn babies, was unquestioned in days gone by I believe. What happened to change all that? We pride ourselves on becoming a developed nation compared with the rest of the world. We think we have come a long way in the pursuit of knowledge, technologies, medical advances, transportation systems, etc. But on the fundamental issue of the meaning of life and respect for life, we seem to have gone downhill. It's difficult to figure this out and the reasons why. One thing I notice is our political leaders always tell us of the greatness of Canada because of it's diversity and multiculturalism. Trudeau advances this idea with a lot of energy. But have all these various cultures with their different religious backgrounds weakened the historic judeo-christian roots that Canada was built on? Or it is the slow rise of humanism in the last 150 years and since Darwin's theory of evolution that is the major contributing factor? Does this have something to do with the lower view of the value of human life? I tend to believe it is the rise of secular humanism in the world that is the major factor.

What is the Islamic Iafif? I am not a follower of Islam. What I've heard of it, I would disagree with. But the Islamic world has contributed things to mankind. Apparently they invented Algebra. Did they invent the decimal system?

Why do you want to exclude the supernatural from it. It usually boils down to that debate doesn't it. I would encourage you to continue to look deeply into all points of view, not just the one-sided view. Man has believed in God or gods since the beginning, thousands of years. Almost everything happening in the world is somehow related to the question of God. The Bible assumes his existence. It tells us in Genesis that God created everything out of nothing. He created us and is in complete control of the universe. What happens is only because he permits it for his greater purposes. I admit I have great struggles personally in life and don't have the answers to many things.

Hmmm, Depends what you believe doesn't it. I haven't checked lately, but I think God is mentioned in the Constitution. But if you take him out of it, what does that change? We also have freedom of speech and freedom of religion, which formally gives people fundamental freedoms that allows everyone to believe what they want. Nothing fanatical about believing in the sanctity of human life. I believe our centuries old laws are based on Judeo-christian teachings. Laws exist to protect everyone from bad things, correct? Without that, what would we have? Don't forget non-christians, other religions, agnostics, and atheists also have beliefs. Whose beliefs would you accept to determine what laws and rights we should have? Who should decide?

Nobody said abortions are mandatory. Paying for them through taxes for the public health care system is mandatory for all taxpayers.

I have to admit I believe a court's rulings are not unlimited. It stems from the fact that as a christian I believe what the Bible says about the sanctity of life and God's law is a higher law than men. In the same way a tyrannical dictator such as Hitler would not have to be obeyed and his court ordering death to Jews could have been ignored. A court cannot rule for example, that everyone over a certain age can be euthanized. The Supreme Court does have God ordained powers but those powers are limited by a higher law. In other words Supreme Court rulings are made by mortal men who can be in error and often are.

Removed that comment.

dialamah, "I don't care of the "caucasian' race declines" I agree we are all human regardless of the colour of our skin. But most races take pride in their own race. Most people feel that. I mention it because I think most people everything is going along as normal and caucasians will continue to exist as we know it. But this does not appear to be the case. There are countries in Europe, the UK being possibly one, and in Canada, B.C. being one, where the caucasian reproduction rate is declining or insufficent to maintain over time. Whether it is 50 years 75 or 100 years, there could be a big drop, especially as a percentage of population. That is likely the case because of a number of factors. But abortion could be a serious reason and it is something which is controllable. BillyBeaver, "it's time to decide whether children are the genetic property of their parents or whether they are individual entities with individual rights" I would submit they (unborn babies) are individual people with the same rights as anybody else. However, we would have to convince an awful lot of people of that I think. Most people seem to be of the opinion that the unborn baby is not human and therefore has no rights. This is be due to a supreme court ruling back around 1980 that declared unborn babies are fetus and not baby or human. How society can accept a group of nine judges who don't likely know any more about it than the average man or woman on the street I don't understand. That's the problem with our judicial system. Too much power in the hands of a group of judges.

BillyBeaver, you make some good points. "we need to rebuild the family unit". Yes the family unit is under attack from many segments of society. Oddly some non-caucasian races are reproducing at far greater rates than caucasians. Caucasians are self-destructing. This is not mentioned in the media. It might be construed as racist, but it is not. The decline and extinction is a legitimate concern. Abortion may be closely linked to this phenomena.

dialamah, "more women die and no more babies are saved". That doesn't make much sense. I would disagree that "no more babies are saved". If it is illegal, abortion is not going to be nearly as frequent as it is now. More resources could be put into supporting the pregnant mother and helping to adopt the baby out if that is what the woman wishes. Thousands of unborn baby's lives could be saved if the emphasis and education was opposed to abortion. Society has gone in a totally wrong direction. If you look at Statistics Canada website, the caucasian race is actually in decline in some western countries. I think to survive a race requires a minimum of 1.9 children per family to survive and not decline toward extinction. In British Columbia I believe the reproduction rate for caucasians is below 1.9. This is not mentioned on mainstream media because of politically correct considerations, but caucasians are in decline in some places. Could this be partly because of high abortion rates?

dialamah, there are several assumptions you make. First you say "laws against it will not stop that". You gave no evidence to support that. If abortion is illegal, it then becomes far more difficult to obtain. More importantly, it sends a message that society does not condone it and discourages it. So the number of abortions, which is currently around 100,000 per year I believe in Canada, may drop drastically. This could save tens of thousands of lives of unborn babies. "it reduces the control men have traditionally had over women". You lost me on that one. It might be the other way around. A man could be held responsible for child maintenance if he doesn't want to marry the woman. If they are already married, there is no issue of control that I can see. Having children is a natural function of human nature. The idea that it is somehow contrary to human nature is incorrect. Perhaps feminists have somehow been led to believe it is an undesirable burden, when in fact, for many couples, it is a happy event. When you say "men are quite happy when women abort the babies", I would say that might be true in some cases but for many it is just part of life. Men should take the assume the responsibility. It is just as much theirs as the woman's. If the woman doesn't want the baby, she should consider giving it up for adoption. There are lots of couples looking for a newborn baby. She may even feel better for doing that in the long run. Society should give women all the support they need in such situations.

"pro enslavement" is a new term I have never heard. Trying to defend human life is not enslavement. People need to show as much concern for the life of the unborn child as they do for women's rights. Thank you for clarifying it is a party policy. Yes I understand that part of democracy. It is a Canadian tragedy that government and courts endorse it. All human life is sacred. The Squid, "I don't get to decide for everyone else". We live in a parliamentary democracy where laws are enacted and courts rule on such issues, and we as citizens have a right to give our input to the decision-making process. So we do in fact have a say on the issue. As far as I am concerned, it is a responsibility for me to speak out for the unborn child who cannot speak for themselves. If you asked the unborn child whether he or she wishes to be aborted, what do you think the answer would be?

Well, there are a certain number of Conservatives who are pro life. I don't know the number. I think the NDP is universally pro abortion or pro choice as they prefer to be called. But with Trudeau's policy, almost every Liberal MP must be pro abortion. Trudeau demonstrates his fanatical pro abortion views by making it a requirement for any Liberal member to be pro abortion. There is no tolerance for an opposing view on this issue in Trudeau's worldview. I am not sure where is he is coming from on this or why.

Feminism describes itself as being the champion of women's rights, which to many if not all feminists, means abortion on demand. Those who believe in the sanctity of life are rejected by the majority of parliamentarians. The PM has even gone so far as to ban any pro life person from becoming a Liberal candidate or MP. To him there is no place in our Canadian parliament for anyone who opposes abortion.

I would take that figure of 84% with a grain of salt. I can't prove it, but I think there are still a lot who would agree with Trump's policies.